Geographically appropriate Holy Cities

[wig]

Is there any way for Civ to take terrain into account when placing a Holy City? I ask because in my latest game, my OO holy city was landlocked. It doesn't have much effect in game terms (well, my Drown units had a longer walk to the ocean). However, it did make an assault on my suspension of disbelief

It would be nice, flavor-wise, if the OO was founded near water, Fellowship near forests, and Runes near hills.

 

[DMN]

Yes, that sounds great. At least if it doens't mean that the script would choose even *worse* locations. Those clergymen seem to avoid my most developed core cities at all costs.

 

[wilboman]

I think that is kind of the point of the script. It seems to me like it normally picks the most recently-founded city.

 

[Kael]

There is a few different weighting factors, but it basically picks the largest city you have that doesnt have a religion and isnt your capital. I'll add the request to add religion specific weighting to holy city placement, but it will be pretty low on the list of things to do.

 

[wig]

There is a few different weighting factors, but it basically picks the largest city you have that doesnt have a religion and isnt your capital. I'll add the request to add religion specific weighting to holy city placement, but it will be pretty low on the list of things to do.

Thanks, Kael. I know it's a low-priority item, but I was hoping it would be a fairly easy change and would sneak into a future build. I'm really enjoying what you've done so far, and I'm not trying to make extra work for the dev team. Ok, that last part is a lie, but I really am having a blast with the mod.

 

[Go Boks]

I don't get why it avoids your capital...

 

[Chandrasekhar]

I don't get why it avoids your capital...

So you have to spread out your infrastructure.

 

[Thennorin]

There is a few different weighting factors, but it basically picks the largest city you have that doesnt have a religion and isnt your capital. I'll add the request to add religion specific weighting to holy city placement, but it will be pretty low on the list of things to do.

Nice! It's a small, flavour thing, but it's all of those added up that make FFH2 such an incredible game/mod The reason my games take too long is because I get lost in the civpedia, or admiring the units. It always happens...

 

[evanb]

I don't think religions should be founded in 'geographically appropriate' cities. So what if the Malakim up in the mountains find how to corrupt Danalin's dreams and not the Falamar by the sea? What if the Amurites in the delta are revealed the secrets of Kilmorph and not the dwarves in their hills?

I don't think it would add flavour, on the contrary, it would just eliminate all the unexpected and interesting twists and turns that a game's story can take.

 

[BCalchet]

I think the point isn't to give the religion to the civ best matching the conditions, but rather to put the holy city in the most suitable city owned: Say, if you, as one civ, have one mountain city and one island city, the Runes holy city would appear in the mountain city if you're first to research it, while the Overlords holy city would be the island one if you're first to research that.

 

[Kael]

Yeah, no ones talking about granting the holy city to anyone but the founder, but we may modify the city of the founder that it is placed in.

 

[Go Boks]

So you have to spread out your infrastructure.

I don't know if that is really a consequence. I can see if it is a balance thing, to keep your capital from getting even more multipliers, but I think it is bad for flavour. I would keep the same criteria as there are now, add in the geographic suggestion and remove the no capital restriction. I think the capital should be treated as any other city.

 

[Kael]

I don't know if that is really a consequence. I can see if it is a balance thing, to keep your capital from getting even more multipliers, but I think it is bad for flavour. I would keep the same criteria as there are now, add in the geographic suggestion and remove the no capital restriction. I think the capital should be treated as any other city.

They do this to present more options. If the capital were just as valid for holy city placement in most cases one city would be the enemy's capital, home to most wonders, holy city to religions, etc etc. Building a lot of value in that city.

By forcing the spread of the holy cities an enemy player will have a few interesting targets to select from. So when attacking you can go after cities because of the local resources, cities to kae over the holy city, or cities for their infrastructure (the capital).

It makes wars to take a holy city possible (and you dont have to crush the owning civ like you would to take their capital) and in FfH makes players more able to crusade to increase/decrease the arm counter by razing holy cities without having to raze a capital (which is typically more stocked with wonders).